Elena Kagan Will Be The Most Unqualified Justice In History

[Joanne98]

NBC News is reporting Elena Kagan will be Barack Obama’s nominee to replace the liberal lion, Justice John Paul Stevens. Kagan is a remarkably poor choice.The stunning lack of curiosity and involvement in the important legal issues of her age, not to mention the law itself, and remarkable absence of compelling written work and record on the part of Elena Kagan has been previously covered in detail by Glenn Greenwald.

I have previously explained the total lack of any experience – ever – of any kind – on Kagan’s part in the court system of the United States. Kagan has never set foot as an attorney of record into a trial courtroom in the United States, not even a small claims justice court; nor for that matter, any appellate court save for the literally handful of spoon fed cases she suddenly worked on as Solicitor General. Kagan has never been a judge in any courtroom, of any court, in the United States. Quite frankly, there is not even any evidence Elena Kagan has sat as a judge for a law school moot court exercise. I have had paralegals and secretaries with better experience than this. Does a nominee for the Supreme Court have to be Gerry Spence, Pat Fitzgerald or David Boies? No, but it would be nice if they had the passion, curiosity and commitment to their profession to go to court at least once. Never has there been a United States Supreme Court Justice with such a complete lack of involvement in the court system. Never.

Duke Law Professor Guy-Uriel Charles has damningly demonstrated a Kagan record of lily white hiring, and corresponding shunning of people of color, at Harvard Law under her guidance that, if considered under the seminal Batson standard of prejudice, would have netted Kagan a sanction from the court and a potential misconduct referral to the appropriate bar authority.

Curiously, and very notably, the only pushback by an Obama Administration, who has consistently gone beyond the call of duty in protecting and bucking up a patently poor nominee in Elena Kagan, has been on the racial hiring component exposed by Professor Charles. Here are the “talking points” memo the Obama Administration sent around to its acolytes and stenographic mouthpieces in the press and internet ether to counter the substantive criticism of Elena Kagan.

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/05/10/elena-kagan-will-be-the-most-unqualified-justice-in-history/

[NJmaverick]

1. Greenwald and Fire Dog Lake both hate her. That means the President MUST have gotten this right

[Eric J in MN]

2. I respect Glenn Greenwald. NT

NT

[NJmaverick]

4. Sorry Greenwald's support of the Republicans on the Supreme Court giving citizenship to corporations

show that respect is sorely misplaced

[no limit]

18. So unless he agree's with you 100% of the time he shouldn't be respected?

Interesting concept.

[NJmaverick]

22. Nope you got it wrong, someone that could be so utterly clueless as to support Citizens United

has a serious misunderstanding of our Constitution and our American ideals. As such, he is ill suited to judge picks for the Supreme Court.

[no limit]

32. So you think Obama should come out and support a constitutional ammendment to overturn the SCOTUS?

How long do you give him to do that before you consider him a failure in that regard?

[NJmaverick]

33. The President has already come out STRONGLY and FIRMLY against this ruling

yet you are trying to warp reality and suggest he doesn't oppose it.

[no limit]

36. You are spinning. He is against the ruling but hasn't said how he will fix it

the only rational fix is a constitutional ammendment. How long do you give the president to come out for this before you consider him a failure on this issue?

[no limit]

47. I won't get an answer from you, will I?

[harkadog]

59. Did you say the same about the ACLU and the AFL-CIO?

Both of whom wrote briefs supporting the decision in CU. http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/scotus/citizensunited_v_fec_acluamicus.pdf http://www.cuvfec.com/documents/case-08-205/Supplemental_Amicus_Brief_of_AFL-CIO.pdf

[ShortnFiery]

42. +1. eom

[emilyg]

50. So do I.

[rudy23]

3. The DLC seems to love her---> take that for what it's worth, DU. n/t

[Donnachaidh]

5. what an absolute knee jerk reaction

learn that on Free Republic? Or at the insurance company board meetings, setting up the propaganda blitz?

[NJmaverick]

6. Sorry, but those two have more than earned their bad reputations

as for Free Republic I am sure they will be happy to join you in your attacks on the President's picks

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NJmaverick]

20. It's not hard to see where you are coming from, and I am certainly not going

to join you in that place

[no limit]

21. If it turns out Obama is torturing people he will support that too

he also doesn't mind that Obama hasn't repealed dont ask dont tell.

He really is a piece of work.

[NJmaverick]

26. If it turns our he is into cat juggling I will call him out as well

do you have anymore wild unsubstantiated accusations to make against our President?

[no limit]

30. I'm not making any accusations. I am pointing out a simple fact

that simple fact being that you refuse to say that if it turns out Obama tortured you wouldn't support him.

I am also pointing out that you think it is okay for the president not to repeal dont ask dont tell using the authority he has as commander and chief.

[NJmaverick]

34. That's a pretty lame fact, that is not germane to the debate

[no limit]

37. You might think it's lame, but it is a fact.

[Demeter]

7. More than Clarence Thomas and Harriet Meirs?

That bar has been set pretty high.

Still, as far as what this country needs, she is the wrong person at the wrong time.

[joeybee12]

12. I know..Obama would have to have nominated belly button lint to get someone

less qualified than those 2.

[Warpy]

19. She is, however, qualified

even if her politics thus far are less than desirable.

Justices often surprise us when they get on the bench as it dawns on them they are free of both corporate and political constraints.

In addition, the type of liberal ideologue we need to balance the dreadful conservative judges is never going to get through a conservative Senate.

She's probably the best we can do at this time, someone with intelligence and the capacity to listen, not just jerk a conservative knee.

[whattheidonot]

31. politcal choice.

this a political chose. at a time the republican base is fired up she is the least objectionable to that base. her stance on terrorism and communications is the norm now for both parties and in this day and age it may well be correct.

[droidamus2]

40. You may be right but,

Why is it that Democrats, progressives and some independents worked hard and put the Democrats in control of the White House, Senate and House of Representatives so they could implement at a minimum a moderate to liberal agenda yet every time they go to write a bill or make a nomination the only people they seemed to be worried about appeasing are the Republicans and all the insane people in their base. I am real tired of the 'its the best we can get' argument as well. How do you know it is the best you can get if you never give the full all out try to get what you really want. In the end the fact is that Obama is just not that much of a progressive and the Congress, especially those in the Senate, are just to weakkneed to put up the good fight and go to the mat for what they say they believe in.

[kiranon]

55. Thomas and Meirs are the bottom - Kagan may hit the top tier.

[MadBadger]

8. Call her inexperienced, okay. But to say she's incurious or unmotivated in the US Legal process?

Give me a Break.

[NJmaverick]

10. The initial pattern is showing a surprising lack of intellectual honesty in the attacks

against Kagan

[izquierdista]

16. I think you're wrong there

Nothing surprises me about Republicans' lack of intellectual honesty; I take it for granted.

[Jennicut]

9. Obama wanted someone with real world experience. I think that is why he chose her.

All the recent Justices have been from the Court of Appeals. I think Obama wanted someone not just from that world?

[NJmaverick]

11. Which is something that was the norm until recently

[Jennicut]

15. Yes it was. Which makes me kind of amused that people flip out about that.

She will be different then what we are used to. Doesn't make it a terrible thing to nominate a non judge. Does that make her stupid and incurious? I doubt it. Will she lack some of what the judges lack? Perhaps only in technical terms.

[ClarkUSA]

27. Yup. 40 of 111 Supreme Court justices had no prior judicial experience

"... two of the last four previous chief justices -- William Rehnquist and Earl Warren -- had no judicial experience when first nominated to the Court by Republican presidents. Neither did other famous justices, including Felix Frankfurter, Louis Brandeis, and John Marshall, known as the "Great Chief Justice."

Rehnquist, Warren, Frankfurter, Brandeis, and Marshall are far from alone. Indeed, according to Findlaw.com's Supreme Court Center, 40 of the 111 Supreme Court justices had no judicial experience when they were first nominated.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005100018

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x293381

[ClarkUSA]

13. Huh? She was Counsel to Pres. Clinton & Solicitor General to Pres. Obama who has argued big cases...

... in front of the Supreme Court. Patrick Leahy has said she is a supremely qualified candidate to be on the Supreme Court. This is clearly another example of RabidDogShit's PUMA opposition to anything that Obama says or does. You'd think that after their Fearless Leader allied herself to Grover Norquist, did outreach to teabaggers to "Kill the Bill" and wanted Socialist Bernie Sanders to lose his Senate seat for his HCR vote wouldn't have credibility here, but there ya go.

[NJmaverick]

17. Leahy is correct, she is more than qualified and a solid choice

[still_one]

23. what bullshit hyperbole. Since both the right and left hate her what does that say? /nt

[NJmaverick]

25. That the President has gotten it right, yet again

[rudy23]

44. Are you on the right board? Here, we don't cheer things that "anger the left as much as the right."

Go start a DLC board.

[tomm2thumbs]

24. 'Qualified Judges' gave us Bush v Gore - nuff said about qualifications /nt

[NJmaverick]

28. WRONG! Clarence Thomas (one of those you speak of) was certainly not qualified

[Dr.Phool]

38. Hey, he was an attorney for Monsanto.

What more qualifications could you ask for in a corporate state?

[Demeter]

29. Exactly! What is Needed on the Court are Principled People

who know the difference between right and wrong and constitutional and unconstitutional, because lately we haven't gotten any of those. And poor Ruthie can't hold up the side all by herself, even if Sonya can figure it out.

But this one? I see no evidence that she has a principle worth defending.

[Doctor_J]

35. Oh, please. Slappy Thomas will own that title long

into the next century. Typical FDL nonsense.

[Captain Hilts]

39. I disagree. nt

[Gman]

41. This article means Obama picked the right person

if he's being attacked from the left like this. Good for Obama. Support the president.

[ShortnFiery]

43. Those of us on the left were right about both the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions ...

as well as continued insults to our Civil Liberties.

We're 95+ % on our predictions of the negative effects of increasing corporate/fascist control of our Country. YET, you continue to jump on the corporate loving bandwagon with President Obama.

What is is it called when you REPEAT the same behaviors in an effort to get a different result? :shrug:

[Dr.Phool]

53. This

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: Insanity

[rudy23]

45. Why are people on this board in support of angering the left? It's like...you're not part of us.

It's like you're part of some New Democratic party that I don't recognize, save for the Rovian psy-ops strategies.

[BootinUp]

56. lol nt

[Myrina]

46. aaaah, yes but she's "Bipartisan" .... POTUS's favorite word!

So, sign her up! :wtf:

[spiritual_gunfighter]

48. Horrible choice Mr. President but I am not surprised in the slightest n/t

[cadam72]

49. What a disturbing post with no understanding of history

Great Article!! You failed to mention the 40, yes 40, SC Justices that attained the role without prior judicial background but due to their work in other fields such as go vernemtn service,academics,etc. Do your homework and understand how the nominating practice works!

Name of Justice Prior Occupations Years On Court Appointed By President:
1. William Rehnquist Asst. U.S. Attorney General 1972-2005 Nixon (Assoc., 1972),
Reagan (Chief, 1986)
2. Lewis Powell President of the American Bar Ass'n,
Private Practice 1972-1987 Nixon
3. Abe Fortas Private Practice 1965-1969 Johnson
4. Byron White Deputy U.S. Attorney General 1962-1993 Kennedy
5. Arthur Goldberg U.S. Secretary of Labor 1962-1965 Kennedy
6. Earl Warren Governor of California 1953-1969 Eisenhower
7. Tom Clark U.S. Attorney General 1949-1967 Truman
8. Harold Burton U.S. Senator 1945-1958 Truman
9. Robert Jackson U.S. Attorney General 1941-1954 F. Roosevelt
10. James Francis Byrnes U.S. Senator 1941-1942 F. Roosevelt
11. William O. Douglas Chairman of the S.E.C. 1939-1975 F. Roosevelt
12. Felix Frankfurter Asst. U.S. Attorney, Asst. Secretary of War,
Prof. of Law at Harvard 1939-1962 F. Roosevelt
13. Stanley Forman Reed U.S. Solicitor General 1938-1957 F. Roosevelt
14. Owen Josephus Roberts Special Counsel in "Teapot Dome" investigation and trials 1930-1945 Hoover
15. Harlan Fiske Stone U.S. Attorney General 1925-1946 Coolidge (Assoc., 1925),
F. Roosevelt (Chief, 1941)
16. Pierce Butler County Attorney, Private Practice 1923-1939 Harding
17. George Sutherland U.S. Senator 1922-1938 Harding
18. Louis Brandeis Private Practice 1916-1939 Wilson
19. James Clark McReynolds U.S. Attorney General 1914-1941 Wilson
20. Charles Evans Hughes Governor of New York,
U.S. Secretary of State 1910-1916,
1930-1941 Taft (Assoc., 1910),
Hoover (Chief, 1930)
21. William Henry Moody U.S. Attorney General 1906-1910 T. Roosevelt
22. George Shiras, Jr Private Practice 1892-1903 Harrison
23. Melville Fuller Private Practice 1888-1910 Cleveland
24. Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar U.S. Secretary of the Interior, U.S. Senator 1888-1893 Cleveland
25. Joseph Philo Bradley Private Practice 1870-1892 Grant
26. Salmon P. Chase U.S. Treasury Secretary 1864-1873 Lincoln
27. Samuel Freeman Miller Private Practice 1862-1890 Lincoln
28. Noah Haynes Swayne U.S. Attorney for Ohio, Ohio Legislator 1862-1881 Lincoln
29. Nathan Clifford Maine & U.S. Attorney General 1858-1881 Buchanan
30. John Archibald Campbell Alabama Legislator 1853-1861 Pierce
31. Benjamin Robbins Curtis Massachusetts Legislator 1851-1857 Fillmore
32. John McKinley U.S. Senator 1838-1852 Van Buren
33. Roger Brooke Taney Maryland & U.S. Attorney General,
U.S. Treasury Secretary 1836-1864 Jackson
34. Henry Baldwin U.S. Congressman 1830-1844 Jackson
35. Joseph Story Speaker of Mass. House of Reps., U.S. Congressman 1812-1845 Madison
36. John Marshall U.S. Secretary of State 1801-1835 Adams
37. Bushrod Washington Virginia House of Delegates,
Reporter for Virginia Court of Appeals 1799-1829 Adams
38. William Paterson Governor of New Jersey 1793-1806 Washington
39. John Jay President of the Continental Congress,
U.S. Secretary of Foreign Affairs 1789-1795 Washington
40. John Rutledge Governor of South Carolina 1789-1791, 1795 Washington

[pscot]

51. Is Firedoglake batshit insane?

Or does it just seem that way?

[ClarkUSA]

52. They're batshit insane.

You're not imaging things.

[classysassy]

54. She was a clerk for the former justice Thurgood Marshall

I am sure just being around that great man will give her insight most other clerks never had and for that alone I like her.

[maritimus49]

57. Kagan for POTUS?

One thing that bothers me about Kagan is that she was quoted as saying "I love the Federalist Society". Please remember that the 5 judges on the Supreme Court who overturned the electoral process and installed probably the worst president in U.S. history either were or had been members of the Federalist Society. Not only was that decision circumstantial (they stipulated that it was NOT to be used as a precedent) but one of the basic tenants of the Federalist Society is States' Rights! In other words, these justices voted against Florida's right to conduct a recount as a result of the massive fraud that occurred during the "election".
I also have to say that I find it doubtful that she will prove a worthy successor to Stevens. I envisage a further shift to the Right with this court as in so many other spheres of our political and social life.

[cyr330]

58. Nope.

Justice Clarence Thomas is the most unqualified.

[BlueMTexpat]

60. Sorry, FDL, Clarence Thomas IS the most unqualified SC Justice in US history.

And will remain so for quite some time. Writing something like this horsesh** doesn't help FDL's credibility measure. At all.
Had Miers been confirmed, she would have joined Thomas at the bottom. And, even with that, I'm not convinced that decisions by Miers would have been much worse than those of the so-called "qualified" Roberts have been. After all, he's giving the RW everything they want.